Women Criminal Defense Attorneys: One-sided Federal Furloughs Create an Imbalance in the System
The federal sequestration is having a devastating effect on our legal system and causing a further deterioration of the rights of indigent clients. What many lawyers and non-lawyers are unaware of is just how one-sided the furloughs really are. I recently learned, much to my surprise, that while our local assistant federal public defenders are being forced to take many furlough days, the Assistant US Attorneys have not had even one. This is because the Justice Department announced that US Attorneys would not have to be furloughed this year due to a last minute reprogramming of funds.
In the Southern District of Florida, on some Fridays there are no public defenders working in the system. But, on those days, the system is staffed, business as usual, with Assistant United States Attorneys. There is something fundamentally wrong with this picture. And this is not a story unique to the Southern District of Florida, this is happening all over this country. In fact, many federal public defenders offices are so hard hit by the federal sequestration that they have been forced to lay off lawyers in addition to instituting days without pay. The assistant federal public defenders that have retained their jobs have had to endure pay cuts in addition to the days without pay. The assistant US Attorneys have faced none of these consequences. I am certainly not advocating for AUSA’s to be furloughed, I don’t think either office should bear these consequences. Our system depends on both sides participating to remain fair, and any consequence to our legal system as a result of the federal sequestration should be balanced and equal.
In our local district, our fearless and dedicated Federal Public Defender, Michael Caruso, is appearing without pay on sequestration Fridays in Magistrate Court so that clients are not deprived of their rights under the law to first appearance hearings or bond determinations. There is still a mechanism for the Courts to appoint CJA counsel, at ironically a much higher cost, but that is not the same as having Assistant Federal Public Defenders present in Court on a daily basis. These defenders are essential gatekeepers and watchdogs for all indigent clients that come through the system. Also it doesn’t address the fairness of having PD clients who are forced to appear in Court without their particular attorney that knows their specific case.
This is a shocking consequence considering that this year we are celebrating 50 years of Gideon and the right to counsel. I suspect that the authors of Gideon would have never imagined that the practical consequence of the right to counsel would be a right that only existed when the budget allowed. This is yet another blow in what some have argued is the loss of the right to counsel.
There isn’t a criminal defense lawyer out there who doesn’t understand that the system is heavily stacked against the defendant, especially when the opponent is the United States Government. But, I thought our system was designed to at least appear like there was a chance at a fair fight. Nobody would ever call a fight fair when one opponent has their hands tied behind their back. So why are we allowing the deck to be stacked with prosecutors while we leave the room empty of defense counsel? It is fundamentally wrong and an obvious imbalance.